Matrix Games Forums

To End All Wars: Mountain InfantryPandora: Eclipse of Nashira Announced! Deal of the Week: Command Ops goes half price!New Fronts are opening up for Commander: The Great WarCharacters of World War 1Sign of for the Pike and Shot Beta!More Games are Coming to Steam! Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great War
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent Page: <<   < prev  98 99 [100] 101 102   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/11/2013 8:14:22 PM   
jeffk3510


Posts: 4005
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Judging by the numbers, the Allies have done very well in the air war to date. Japan has taken many more losses. The Allied fighter pools are now drained, however, so going forward it's going to be very difficult to wage war. If the Japanese pools are likewise strained to the breaking point, okay. But if the Japanese have plenty of fighters, isn't there something wrong? I mean, if the Allies can wage war effectively but end up in worse position than Japan? I think this is a common questions, but here are the numbers that paint the picture well, I think. What do you guys think?

As of 12/1/42

Japanes Planes Downed: 7,122
Allied Planes Downed: 4,673


The Allies have lost almost exactly two-thirds the number of aircraft that Japan has lost. So, if anybody should be straining for aircraft now it should be Japan, right?

Here are the top 15 model losses in the game (12 of these are Japanese, three are Allied)

982 Tojo
800 Betty
778 A6M2 Zero
764 P-40E
576 B5N2 Kate
428 Ic Oscar
421 Jake
403 G3M2 Nell
381 Lily
323 IIa Sally
322 Ic Sally
316 P-39D
314 Ia Helen
268 D3A1 Val
261 A6M3b Zero
248 Hurricane IIb

American Fighter Pools

10 P-39D (a few squadrons still on map with less than half strength)
0 P-40E (a half dozen squadrons still on map, most at half strength or less)
7 P-400 (no sqadrons on map)
0 P-38E (one squadron on map with 7 planes, plus several restricted on West Coast)
0 P-38F (no squadrons on map)
4 P-38G (one squadron on map with 9 planes)
14 P-40K (five squadrons on map, mainly full strength)

RAF Fighter Pools - nothing, except a couple of Hurricanes

American Bomber Pools


0 B-17E (a few understrength squadrons on map)
12 B-17F (a few understrength squadrons on map)
4 B-24D (a handful of understrenght squadrons on map)
16 B-25B (one squadron on map)
3 B-25 C (a half dozen squadrons on map in decent shape)
11 A20A (one squadron on map)
0 B-26B (three squadrons on map with zero or one plane)

RAF Bomber Pools - nothing, except two or three Wellingtons

Are these numbers skewed or is this the intent of AE (or Reluctant Admiral)? Is Japan really supposed to be the major industrial power while the Allies lag badly?

If the Allies wage a mainly defensive air war, successfully judging by the numbers, but still run out of aircraft, is the intent to reign in the Allies and keep them fighting largely defensively in '42 (and probably well into '43)?

Or do I have a skewed mod or am I misreading things?


I don't think you're misreading anything. With Japan being able to control production, this will always be an issue. You are stuck with historical AC numbers regardless of how well you're doing in the game. Also, I don't know what John has tweeked for RA. I would like to think he hasn't made it a Jap wet dream that only benefits him... I just don't know.

_____________________________

Follow our WiTPAE team PBEM game against bilbow and hartwig.modrow http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2965846&mpage=1&key=?

Follow my WITPAE PBEM game against Schanilec. http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3495605

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2971
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/11/2013 8:17:03 PM   
jeffk3510


Posts: 4005
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wargmr

I am pretty sure you are already doing this but have you swapped out all training planes with older models of fighters to free up any newer aircraft at CONUS or other training areas?



You can't do that with the majority of them. You can swap good fighters for good fighters really...if he was producing 100 Lancers a month, then yes, that would be great..but you mainly swap out AC for Warhawks which he needs right now. Besides, his pools are so low to swap out ac anyways...to "upgrade/downgrade" you have to have the full amount of AC to fill out the squadron to begin with. Usually 25 planes in the early stages of the game.

_____________________________

Follow our WiTPAE team PBEM game against bilbow and hartwig.modrow http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2965846&mpage=1&key=?

Follow my WITPAE PBEM game against Schanilec. http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3495605

(in reply to Wargmr)
Post #: 2972
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/11/2013 8:20:13 PM   
Cap Mandrake

 

Posts: 16470
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
American Fighter Pools

10 P-39D (a few squadrons still on map with less than half strength)
0 P-40E (a half dozen squadrons still on map, most at half strength or less)
7 P-400 (no sqadrons on map)
0 P-38E (one squadron on map with 7 planes, plus several restricted on West Coast)
0 P-38F (no squadrons on map)
4 P-38G (one squadron on map with 9 planes)
14 P-40K (five squadrons on map, mainly full strength)

RAF Fighter Pools - nothing, except a couple of Hurricanes

American Bomber Pools


0 B-17E (a few understrength squadrons on map)
12 B-17F (a few understrength squadrons on map)
4 B-24D (a handful of understrenght squadrons on map)
16 B-25B (one squadron on map)
3 B-25 C (a half dozen squadrons on map in decent shape)
11 A20A (one squadron on map)
0 B-26B (three squadrons on map with zero or one plane)

RAF Bomber Pools - nothing, except two or three Wellingtons

Are these numbers skewed or is this the intent of AE (or Reluctant Admiral)? Is Japan really supposed to be the major industrial power while the Allies lag badly?

If the Allies wage a mainly defensive air war, successfully judging by the numbers, but still run out of aircraft, is the intent to reign in the Allies and keep them fighting largely defensively in '42 (and probably well into '43)?

Or do I have a skewed mod or am I misreading things?


This has been our experience up to April 43 in AE scenario 2. The best you can do is convert some P-40E or P-39 squadrons to P-40K (when available), thus freeing up spare P-40E's or P-39's to fill up the remaining understrength squadrons. Also, if you have rear area P-39 squadrons, back-convert to P-400 or P-43 or P-36 and free up the P-39's for the front lines.

You will not have enough P-38's. Try not to get them killed. (there are very few P-38 squadrons that can be down-converted...this is 100% true for the resitrcted P-38 squadrosn in CONUS). When you start getting USMC Corsairs, things will get a bit better.


< Message edited by Cap Mandrake -- 7/11/2013 8:23:10 PM >

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2973
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/11/2013 8:27:54 PM   
Sakai007


Posts: 172
Joined: 3/12/2012
Status: offline
When I play against the AI one of the first things I do is get USMC F4U squadrons to Aden so I can dispense them to that area of the war. I know this is a-historic but I play the game like I am the boss, not trying to strictly emulate history. Once I can get some F4Us and P47s in the air over Burma the situation changes quickly. I must say that I am really enjoying this AAR, and many of these idea will be used in my next game.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 2974
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/11/2013 8:30:47 PM   
Cap Mandrake

 

Posts: 16470
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Another trick is to cannibalize airframes from a squadron fragment into another squadron of the same plane type at the same base. Use the "disband" button. As the donor squadron main element is at another base, the donor squadron remains in the game but with fewer pilots and planes.

In this fashion, you can create a nearly full squadron while drawing down but not disbanding the donor squadron. Then you send the donor squadron to a rear area to build up slowly with replacement aircraft.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 2975
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/11/2013 9:31:44 PM   
Ol_Dog


Posts: 268
Joined: 2/23/2003
From: Southern Illinois
Status: offline
We believe you because you are a long way from Washington

_____________________________

Common Sense is an uncommon virtue.
If you think you have everything under control, you don't fully understand the situation.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2976
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/11/2013 11:20:10 PM   
princep01

 

Posts: 934
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
Has anyone tried disbanding one of those P-38E squadrons in the US that is otherwise stuck there?  If you have, do any of the planes end up in the replacement pool or do they just disappear altogether?  I have been tempted to try this, but the squadrons are otherwise useful for training and do come in very handy should the ambitious imperials try invading the US.

Cap't Mandrake, the change out routine you describe is useful and I encourage Canoe to do it if and when he can.

In my current game the air combat has not been intense (late September 42 and both sides have lost only about 2200 planes).  So, my pools are better than those shown by Canoe, but they still aren't what I would call "healthy".  I just think it is primarily a function of the game.  Even though the US only committed something like 30% of its AC production to the Pacific (if I recall correctly), it still seems like the US is getting the short straw when the imperials get PDU on option.

Canoe, I think you have already learned this, but upgrades can be done "pierside" rather than in the shipyard.  There is no penalty for using pierside that I have detected.  However, looking at the list of ships in Colombo, you might want to consider losing a bit of time in exchange for safety and send some of these to Capetown to repair.  If the imperials try a lightning port strike on Colombo, it might be very damaging for you.

(in reply to Ol_Dog)
Post #: 2977
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/11/2013 11:57:36 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 9770
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
I figured you guys might appreciate an update that will help bring closure to the OpSec question.  John and I have exchanged lengthy but not exhaustive emails (that might take several emails).  The person who originally notified me of his own OpSec concerns also wrote John a lengthy and particularly well written email.  So John is fully aware of what happened, he's aware that I'm not taking night-bombing precautions until further notice, and we've briefly discussed night bombing (he didn't come right out and say it, but I think he intends to keep it at the historical nuisance level, which suits me fine and which I will reciprocate).  This all came together very nicely.  I don't think the slightest questions exist with regard to anybody involved in either AAR.  And that concludes the matter, as far as I'm concerned.

(in reply to princep01)
Post #: 2978
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 12:03:21 AM   
Grollub


Posts: 6541
Joined: 10/9/2005
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

What's with the ironclad hamster? 

http://jezebel.com/you-know-you-want-this-handmade-guinea-pig-chain-mail-513970283

ETA; The winning bid for the hamster chainmail was $24300 ...

< Message edited by Grollub -- 7/12/2013 12:04:56 AM >


_____________________________

“Pay attention to where you are going because without meaning you might get nowhere.”

-- Winnie the Pooh

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2979
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 12:20:38 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Hmm, I'm playing at pretty much the same date as you in a Scenario 1 game vs Damian and I've lost 5200 planes but have more than enough P40Es, P40Ks and P39s to fill all my frontline squadrons.

Are you wasting a load of them on rear area training or rear area CAP or something? I have mine at the spearpoint pretty much. I'd be happy to send you a save game if you want to compare losses and numbers on map.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Grollub)
Post #: 2980
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 12:43:12 AM   
Schlemiel

 

Posts: 154
Joined: 10/20/2011
Status: offline
Well, the loss of carriers probably means a much higher % of yours are navy based than the losses suffered by Canoe.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 2981
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 12:44:31 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 9770
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
All of my P-40K and P-38G are on the front lines in Sumatra. I do probably have a fair number of P-40E in Oz. I might be able to downgrade them (though I have absoltuley zero aircraft to switch to, so I might be screwed there). But the E model probably isn't suited to frontline service.

I think there's something screwy with the pools and replacement rates.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 7/12/2013 12:49:25 AM >

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 2982
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 12:59:49 AM   
JohnDillworth


Posts: 1927
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

What's with the ironclad hamster?


Ah, my regular icon is doing penance for an unintentional breach of operation security. He will be back, but I need to send a message. Anyway, he is an armored Guinea pig and he is cute as hell, and he will stand in for my regular avatar until Puss-in-Boots get with the program.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it’s still on the list.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2983
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 2:59:57 AM   
Cap Mandrake

 

Posts: 16470
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline
If you push hard in late '42 the Allied fighter pools will indeed be as CR reports. You will have understrength squadrons.

The P-40E is not a disaster compared to the K model. Use the P-40B/E and P-39 for point defense. The P-40K for defense and LRCAP and escort missions. Use the scarce P-38's for sweeps and LRCAP.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to jeffk3510)
Post #: 2984
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 3:38:32 AM   
Cribtop


Posts: 3584
Joined: 8/10/2008
From: Lone Star Nation
Status: offline
First off, hilarious pepper discussion! And yes, CR, I was almost a novelty item or court jester at my first big law firm job (Look what the weirdo first year associate will eat!). I hope I can continue to enjoy the spicy stuff, but if I ever lose my mojo I figure it's the perfect old man weight loss plan. If I can't eat hot stuff my calorie intake will plummet due to sheer boredom!

Second, I am really worried about your pools. This is par for the course in many games, sadly, but in this particular case it could be that John has unpeeled the first layer of your "onion" defense in northern Sumatra. Eventually, you'll be fine on the strategic level, but knowing the state of your pools I worry about Operation Des Wallace for the first time. What can you do? Well, you may have to concede the air and sea until your pools recover. You have the supply for that, but it increase the odds of a counter-offensive into your bridgehead. Fortunately, you have mauled many IJA units, and he may be forced to give you just the breathing space you need.

PS - I would argue that this shows the difficulties of maintaining two air fronts in active combat as the Allies.

_____________________________

Follow my latest AAR as I do battle with our resident author Cuttlefish at: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2742735

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 2985
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 10:27:09 AM   
Squamry

 

Posts: 68
Joined: 2/28/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel




I note that although the "Air" and "Exp" stats are high the "Defn" ratings are pretty mediocre. This has all the hallmarks of a unit that has been doing a lot of CAP but little training. Personally I'm not sure which are more important, but when you put fighters to train as escort the stats that increase quckly are Air and Defn. If you put at high CAP levels instead then the Exp and Air stats go up but Defn hardly at all and Exp more quickly than if just training.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2986
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 11:30:55 AM   
String


Posts: 2653
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Estonia
Status: offline
IIRC it is also possible (atleast it once was) to disband-merge some of the west coast squadrons, thereby creating and excess of aircraft in the remaining squadron. Those excess planes could then be transferred to pools.

_____________________________

Surface combat TF fanboy

(in reply to jeffk3510)
Post #: 2987
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 12:20:14 PM   
JohnDillworth


Posts: 1927
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline
If things get really, really bad and the whole enterprise hangs on the need for fighters you can strip your carriers. you then cede the seas to the IJN as he can split the KB without fear and impose a blockade

_____________________________

The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it’s still on the list.

(in reply to String)
Post #: 2988
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 12:37:59 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 9770
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
It's worrying, but it's not time to despair.  At least not yet.  The Allies do have some things going for them.  At present, with the help of some lent carrier fighter squadrons, Sabang's fighter defenses are pretty deep and manned by very good pilots.  More importantly, John has experienced so many beatings while attacking Akyab and Ramree Island that I think he is leery of taking on Sabang.  Probably he'll eventually attack in desperation.  Then it will be a matter of:  can he stomach the losses long enough to overcome the thin stockpile of Allied fighters.  This probably goes on for quite some time.

But this has been eye opening for me.  I would think that the way the Allies have waged war to this point would put them in a position at the end of '42 to drive a stake through Japan's heart.  Instead, I'm clawing tooth and nail to put together a decent airforce.

When I step back and look at it that way it really does seem ludicrous.  I've always known about the low aircraft pools for the Allies, but yowza.

(in reply to JohnDillworth)
Post #: 2989
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 1:24:51 PM   
Wild


Posts: 307
Joined: 12/10/2007
Status: offline
Hi CR. I'm an avid reader of your AAR's but rarely post. I'm really enjoying this one.

As to aircraft pools, most of the allied air was directed against the Nazis as i'm sure you know. Plus it makes for a better game this way. Not much fun if you can just waltz in and crush the Japs without much effort. Just my 2 cents.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2990
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 3:33:58 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 7049
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Judging by the numbers, the Allies have done very well in the air war to date. Japan has taken many more losses. The Allied fighter pools are now drained, however, so going forward it's going to be very difficult to wage war. If the Japanese pools are likewise strained to the breaking point, okay. But if the Japanese have plenty of fighters, isn't there something wrong? I mean, if the Allies can wage war effectively but end up in worse position than Japan? I think this is a common questions, but here are the numbers that paint the picture well, I think. What do you guys think?

As of 12/1/42

Japanes Planes Downed: 7,122
Allied Planes Downed: 4,673


The Allies have lost almost exactly two-thirds the number of aircraft that Japan has lost. So, if anybody should be straining for aircraft now it should be Japan, right?

Here are the top 15 model losses in the game (12 of these are Japanese, three are Allied)

982 Tojo
800 Betty
778 A6M2 Zero
764 P-40E
576 B5N2 Kate
428 Ic Oscar
421 Jake
403 G3M2 Nell
381 Lily
323 IIa Sally
322 Ic Sally
316 P-39D
314 Ia Helen
268 D3A1 Val
261 A6M3b Zero
248 Hurricane IIb

American Fighter Pools

10 P-39D (a few squadrons still on map with less than half strength)
0 P-40E (a half dozen squadrons still on map, most at half strength or less)
7 P-400 (no sqadrons on map)
0 P-38E (one squadron on map with 7 planes, plus several restricted on West Coast)
0 P-38F (no squadrons on map)
4 P-38G (one squadron on map with 9 planes)
14 P-40K (five squadrons on map, mainly full strength)

RAF Fighter Pools - nothing, except a couple of Hurricanes

American Bomber Pools


0 B-17E (a few understrength squadrons on map)
12 B-17F (a few understrength squadrons on map)
4 B-24D (a handful of understrenght squadrons on map)
16 B-25B (one squadron on map)
3 B-25 C (a half dozen squadrons on map in decent shape)
11 A20A (one squadron on map)
0 B-26B (three squadrons on map with zero or one plane)

RAF Bomber Pools - nothing, except two or three Wellingtons

Are these numbers skewed or is this the intent of AE (or Reluctant Admiral)? Is Japan really supposed to be the major industrial power while the Allies lag badly?

If the Allies wage a mainly defensive air war, successfully judging by the numbers, but still run out of aircraft, is the intent to reign in the Allies and keep them fighting largely defensively in '42 (and probably well into '43)?

Or do I have a skewed mod or am I misreading things?


Your situation mirrors my own experience in my stock scen 2 game vs Ark. I do not know if John can produce the same amount in this mod but expect he is producing plenty. Basically, serious offensive operations were hampered until the hellcat came into production. That was then my go to aircraft for about a year.

Not fun but in the end it does make for a longer and more competitive game. And keeps the Japanese player from bailing some times. If he was constrained to historical numbers such as you are, his position would already be hopeless. I will say that in 1945 my total air superiority in numbers and quality gets a bit boring. You can only hope that John is bored now and that will cause him to make a big mistake...

If I recall, some posters did mention the danger of an offensive in 1942 due to this issue. If I were John, I would go all "Rader" on you and just attack you in the air on all fronts regardless of losses. I don't think he pays enough attention to these matters but a good JFB can do the math and know you are short of aircraft. In order to throw you out of Sumatra, he is going to have to take the air back. Something he can do if he is willing to be totally ruthless. Some might argue that he would be robbing Peter to pay Paul but as I see it his only concern at this stage has to be the total defeat of your invasion. Otherwise he has lost everything.

< Message edited by crsutton -- 7/12/2013 3:48:45 PM >


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2991
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 3:37:14 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 7049
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: princep01

Has anyone tried disbanding one of those P-38E squadrons in the US that is otherwise stuck there?  If you have, do any of the planes end up in the replacement pool or do they just disappear altogether?  I have been tempted to try this, but the squadrons are otherwise useful for training and do come in very handy should the ambitious imperials try invading the US.

Cap't Mandrake, the change out routine you describe is useful and I encourage Canoe to do it if and when he can.

In my current game the air combat has not been intense (late September 42 and both sides have lost only about 2200 planes).  So, my pools are better than those shown by Canoe, but they still aren't what I would call "healthy".  I just think it is primarily a function of the game.  Even though the US only committed something like 30% of its AC production to the Pacific (if I recall correctly), it still seems like the US is getting the short straw when the imperials get PDU on option.

Canoe, I think you have already learned this, but upgrades can be done "pierside" rather than in the shipyard.  There is no penalty for using pierside that I have detected.  However, looking at the list of ships in Colombo, you might want to consider losing a bit of time in exchange for safety and send some of these to Capetown to repair.  If the imperials try a lightning port strike on Colombo, it might be very damaging for you.


It is some help to free them up but the P38E with a service rating of 4 is not a front line aircraft. You are almost better off with a squadron of P39s.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to princep01)
Post #: 2992
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 3:53:34 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 9770
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
I think the disparity in aircraft pools might actually be counterproductive to the AE gaming environment.  Here's why:

If I conclude that it's very difficult or very risky for the Allies to sustain a major land-mass air war in 1942 due to the lack of fighters, I'm much more likely to hang back in '42 and wait until into '43 when the pools are sufficient. 

Most of us know that the game can reach a state of doldrums in '42 - the period between when the Japanese slow down and when the Allies ramp up.  It's traditionally been summer '42 that is kind of quiet.  Do we really want to foster an environment whicn encourages Allied players to be less aggressive during the second half of '42?  I don't think so.

There may be exceptions - for instance, a island-based, carrier-focused campaign might still be possible in '42 - but I'm not a big fan of the pool disparity. 

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 2993
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 4:03:22 PM   
viberpol


Posts: 827
Joined: 10/20/2005
From: Gizycko, Poland, EU
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton
Your situation mirrors my own experience in my stock scen 2 game vs Ark.
[...]
I will say that in 1945 my total air superiority in numbers and quality gets a bit boring.


Yeah... erm... it is booooring...


< Message edited by viberpol -- 7/12/2013 4:04:36 PM >


_____________________________

Przy lackim orle, przy koniu Kiejstuta Archanioł Rusi na proporcach błysł

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 2994
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 4:10:07 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Hmm, everyone seems to assume some things which may not, necessarily, be true.

Assumptions:
1. CR needs to contest the air war.
2. CR needs to contest he air war over Sumatra.
3. CR needs to maintain aerial superiority over Sabang.

These things are not necessarily true and certainly are not always true. I can think of several PBEMed AARs in which Allied players fought numerically and quantitatively superior Japanese forces and safeguarded Sumatra etc whilst inflicting disproportionate losses 2-3:1 kill ratios. Several of these AARs demonstrated this in early to mid-42 when there were even fewer Allied fighters arriving than here are a present in CRs game.

I would suggest CR is holding too many fighters back in useless rear areas. I'm literally about two weeks behind him in-game in a slightly modified scenario 1 and I don't have any problems maintaining 600 front-line fighters despite even heavier losses than CR has suffered. It sounds to me like the REMFs are getting CAP a the expense of the front lines.

Here's a question. Is there any way to turn the IJAAF bombing of Sabang either neutral to the war effort or actively helpful to the Allies? Assuming no Allied fighters can fly for some reason.

Fighting isn't the only path to winning plus giving him a positive space which shows him being all HULK-MEGA-SMASH will meet all the desires of his heart - and prevent him looking for what the negative space shows.

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 7/12/2013 4:13:28 PM >


_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to viberpol)
Post #: 2995
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 4:32:29 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 17862
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I think the disparity in aircraft pools might actually be counterproductive to the AE gaming environment.  Here's why:

If I conclude that it's very difficult or very risky for the Allies to sustain a major land-mass air war in 1942 due to the lack of fighters, I'm much more likely to hang back in '42 and wait until into '43 when the pools are sufficient. 

Most of us know that the game can reach a state of doldrums in '42 - the period between when the Japanese slow down and when the Allies ramp up.  It's traditionally been summer '42 that is kind of quiet.  Do we really want to foster an environment whicn encourages Allied players to be less aggressive during the second half of '42?  I don't think so.

There may be exceptions - for instance, a island-based, carrier-focused campaign might still be possible in '42 - but I'm not a big fan of the pool disparity. 


From the JFB side of things (my opinion), you're looking at this wrong.

First off, there's no inherent pool disparity. If the Japanese don't touch their production numbers and they're hard coded, there's not a pool disparity 'baked in' to the game. At this stage of the war, he would be producing something like 50-75 Oscars (Ia production on, Ib production on and Ic or IIa default production); a miniscule number of Tojo IIa (however big the converted research factory is when it flips to production) and 50-60 A6M2. Oh, a bunch of Nates too. Basically a PDU off, research and production off model. Hardly a disparity-the Allies are probably outproducing by default at this stage.

The disparity comes by the freedom the Japanese player has in selecting airframes on which to focus and build, not anything inherent in the default game settings.

What you're saying in essence is that the gameplay is counterproductive to the AE gameplay environment because your opponent is using the tools at his disposal and maximizing their efficacy. Yup. But this makes about as much sense as Japanese players moaning and groaning about how much supply or fuel the Allies can move at will around the map from day one. Boo hoo, JFBs-that's part of the game-a surfeit of Allied supplies and fuel.

You're surprised that can't go bounding across the Indian Ocean and stick a stake in the Japanese war engine in November 1942? You haven't even had a credible "Midway moment" wherein the Japanese navy was dealt a killing blow yet either. So, the Japanese navy is largely intact (and it's a lot tougher in this mod than most), his airforces are still on par with your own and his land forces are-at this point in the war-at least as capable as yours. And you're wondering why you haven't been able to gut him in 1942? Yeesh...

I agree with your sentiment that obscene and other-worldly Japanese aircraft pools are likely to keep the Allies on their heels longer than historically possible. But this is a known trade off in the game.

You can moderate this in your selection of game (PDU off, realistic R&D on) or opponent (discussions regarding realistic production). Doesn't sound much like you dug into this before your gamestart. Or you willingly assumed the risks associated with these settings. You've had how many CGs as the Allies now with AE? Yet you seem surprised by this outcome.

For those AFBs that try the 'sitting on my heels for a year' approach, they're asking for a Japanese autovictory or an opponent that drops the game. If you don't engage and fight (something all aggressive Japanese players should strive to elicit in year one), you're ceding territory, VPs, units, replacements and strategic momentum. All grist for the mill of a Japanese autovictory. If you do stand and fight-or go on offensives in two theatres-you're going to deplete your reserves. Pretty straightforward and absolutely not a surprise.

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2996
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 4:44:16 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 17862
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline
Canoerebel,

How many pages back did we discuss 'typical' Japanese production settings for fighters? Several JFBs gave monthly Tojo IIa production values in the 150-200 range. This did not include Oscar, Zero or Nick production. So figure another 50-100; 100-200 and 40-75 respectively. This until the Tony, Raiden, George and Frank come online in some capacity or the other. We aren't talking about the Shinden, Sam or other late-war fighters yet either. It's an enormous capacity.

Sure, there's HI 'costs' to doing this, but it's possible and-in the hands of an attentive Japanese player-even probable. A more fruitful exploration, IMO, would be to delve into the trade-offs of such an approach. There may be some opening for you to exploit, particularly in this mod, with that foreknowledge. But you need to ask and 'get down into the weeds' numbers-wise to understand that aspect of the game. You have shown historical reluctance to understand the Japanese production system and its modeling in the game, so you may be shortchanging your knowledge of how this game is played from the other side. My opinion, but knowing your opponent seems important to me.



_____________________________


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 2997
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 5:18:22 PM   
richlove


Posts: 144
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

...

Here's a question. Is there any way to turn the IJAAF bombing of Sabang either neutral to the war effort or actively helpful to the Allies? Assuming no Allied fighters can fly for some reason.

Fighting isn't the only path to winning plus giving him a positive space which shows him being all HULK-MEGA-SMASH will meet all the desires of his heart - and prevent him looking for what the negative space shows.


I'll try:
The assumption here is that CR has to win the air war over Sumatra, right now... which isn't necessarily true. If CR cedes air superiority, what does that get John?
1) Supply interdiction to CR's troops
2) The ability to bomb CRs troops
3) The ability to stop fort and port building by constant bombing

To counter:
1) CR has said he has a ton of supply in place. In the short to medium term, #1 doesn't matter
2) In well chosen terrain, against troops in forts and well supplied and supported - how much would that matter?
3) No counter but irrelevant if CR has built everything up to where it needs to be (no spoilage levels would be my recommendation in this case).

So to paint the positive / negative space picture:
1) Put up a token defense of Sabang's air space so that it looks like you're beaten. Throw in a handful of USN carrier fighters to really sell it.
2) Periodically run xAKs into port w/ supplies. Let John sink them all. Maybe try to defend them, just a bit. You have the ships and you have the supplies, and it's worth it if it keeps KB prowling in the Bay of Bengal.
3) Look for an ambush opportunity of KB, if you're feeling frisky.
4) Set up AA traps over your troops to attrit John's aircraft.

Basically give John something to pound on, keep him close, and let him flail away. In the mean time, do something sneaky somewhere else.


< Message edited by richlove -- 7/12/2013 5:54:04 PM >

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 2998
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 6:31:05 PM   
Cribtop


Posts: 3584
Joined: 8/10/2008
From: Lone Star Nation
Status: offline
CR, I am encouraged to hear your squadrons at Sabang are still in OK shape. I incorrectly inferred that both your pools AND your squadrons were empty.

Also, as Nemo states, given your supply levels you may not need air superiority over Sabang for a while anyway. However, IMHO John will eventually take on that viper's nest and the results should be pleasant for you if you can stand the heat. You might even go with a modified version of Richlove's advice. Pull out fighters to make it appear John has won. Then spring them back into place to create the mother of all CAP traps.

Two issues: 1) Where do you stash the fighters? It has to be somewhere within "one jump" range. 2) If you don't evac your ships from Sabang you are gambling on outguessing him. If you do evac, he may not throw in everything at Sabang, reducing the haul for you.

_____________________________

Follow my latest AAR as I do battle with our resident author Cuttlefish at: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2742735

(in reply to richlove)
Post #: 2999
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/12/2013 6:48:09 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 9770
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
12/02/42 - D+22, Operation Des Wallace
 
At Sea:  Japanese combat ships everywhere.  CA Australia is sunk in a sharp engagement with two two IJN CAs at Medan; then the Quincy TF comes in a that CA is also damaged.  I think the Japanese lost DD Asashio with one cruiser set afire.  Then the Yamato TF comes in to bombard.  Over on the west coast, a six CA TF bombards Sibolga (two of the cruisers bearing names I've never seen before).  Fuso is over that way too.  The BB Washington TF bombards Georgetown with good effect.  Lots of big ships in close proximity here.

In the Air:  Big KB Kate/Zero and LBA Nell rades vs. Allied troops at Medan face off against a P40K squadron and a USN F4F-4 squadron (lent by a fleet carrier).  John is highly pissed, because the Allied fighters pretty much ignored the Zeroes, which ignored my fighters.  John lost about 30 Kates and a handful of Nells.  The Allies lost less than a handful of fighters.  But some bombers did get through to further disrupt Allied troops at Medan.  Overall, I think the KB's strike ability is modestly degraded, but strike sorties probably have dropped enought to worry John.  If he went into battle at 100% sorties/100% Kates and is down to, say, 75% sorties/90% Kates, he might have a slight case of the yips.

On the Ground: The Allied attack at Medan does much more damage to the Japanese garrison, but still fails to take the base.  The Japanese are badly outnumbered, but the Allied troops have 90% disruption.  On the other hand, they drew supply finally, so that's no longer a limiting factor.  Unsure whether to try again tomorrow.  Despite the excessive disruption, supply, overwhelming numbers, and the tattered Japanese units might make it work.  I"ll thnk on it.

The Bull and the Bluff:  The Allied carriers (with reduced fighter loads since three squadrons are at Sabang) are between Ceylon and Sabang, apparently unsighted by patrols since they began working their way towards Sumatra a few days ago.  I have quite a few damaged ships at Sabang that need to retire to Ceylon.  I have about eight supply, fuel and reinforcements TFs (and reinforcing combat ships) near the carriers that need to go to Sabang.  With the KB down on sorties and having remained in the same position three days to hammer Medan, I think it's highly unlikely (not impossible) that John will keep them there or close, so I'm thinking on taking the chance of pushing my carriers in close to Sabang.  My thinking is that the sudden appearance of carriers might bluff John into pulling his carriers back - or at least not attacking for a few days - so that all the other Allied shipping can come and go as needed.  If this works, the Allied carriers will then move into the Andaman Sea to hammer Port Blair (recon shows that field 37% damaged due to 4EB flying from Ramree most days). The carriers could finish of BB Mutsu and take out a bunch of the Japanese shipping that's cut off and busy shuttling troops from Burma to Malaya/Thailand.  Kind of a complicated scenario and it is a risk, so I'm evaluating carefully.  But I think something along these lines is in order.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 7/12/2013 6:55:07 PM >

(in reply to Cribtop)
Post #: 3000
Page:   <<   < prev  98 99 [100] 101 102   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent Page: <<   < prev  98 99 [100] 101 102   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.157